Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Fords and Hexars
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:03:22 -0800
References: <B6DBB3C8.1A63%douglas@dysmedia.com>

Douglas Cooper wrote:
><Snip> 
> Any forty-dollar swatch or Timex will outperform even the best 20,000 dollar
> hand-made mechanical chronometer in terms of accuracy.  Using Erwin's
> quantitative analysis, you would have to determine that the Swatch is a
> better product.  Many, if not most, also evince a lower failure rate than
> the expensive Swiss product.  I can see Erwin timing the two products
> against an atomic clock, using the most precise and up-to-the-minute
> scientific criteria; then doing a statistic analysis of failure rate.
>><Snip> 

I have had 20 dollar digital watches to wear while my main watch was being fixed
and it is ridiculous how dead on accurate they are!
I just made the same analogy when describing the 
http://www.acculab.com/frame.php3?elif+warranty+epyt+htm+t_img+t_warranty 
Acculab GSI-200 scale i just brought home for 99 bucks Friday.
It looks like it was made by matel but you pour your Metol on and read out the
number a second later.
My classic gorgeous Ohaus triple beam takes up 3 times the space in my darkroom
chemical closet.
You have to zero out the tare by weighing it and then wait for the balance to
stop moving left and right again before you know how much you are weighing.
http://www.ohaus.com/products/glo/scripts/view/viewproduct.asp?Recno=710-00
Analog with a big A!
I'm not sure if one is really more accurate than the other.
But the cheap digital one is sure easier to use: more user friendly!
(but is it good for my soul?)
Mark Rabiner

Portland, Oregon
USA
http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/